[Politics] Corbyn Party?

[stewart12]

I've never met a working class person (including myself) who didn't think he was an arse. Jezza's appeal is pretty much limited to carefully scruffy middle class folk

yep, and Corbyn was deeply unpopular in the red wall working class constituencies, partly contributing to Labour's disaster in 2019

 

[Blue3]

Anybody who campaigned for labour last election will tell you that Corbyn was kryptonite. Seamus Milne was a disaster as a political strategist and comments like our 'friends from hamas and hezbollah' were ill judged.

I am sure corbyn meant well but was steeped in years of protest politics and naive comments and behaviour. I still believe he would have been better than Boris Johnson and current Tory govt.

But i read some of the bitterness from his acolytes now and realise he was a lightning rod for some very nasty individuals and whoever followed him if he had won would have been much worse.

As for Starmer. I actually like him. What he has achieved in less than 4 years has been immense. He may not excite but he doesnt repulse. No party has ever won an election in the uk without winning the centre ground.

I am also old enough to realise that an imperfect labour govt is better than tory one

I campaigned at the last election and yes JC was obviously unpopular which I think had far more to with the concerted efforts to besmirch his reputation from the press the Tories and even some elements of his own party

 

[ROSM]

I campaigned at the last election and yes JC was obviously unpopular which I think had far more to with the concerted efforts to besmirch his reputation from the press the Tories and even some elements of his own party

You may be right but he was naive enough to give people a lot of ammunition.

 

[aolstudios]

You may be right but he was naive enough to give people a lot of ammunition.

Well exactly.
Labour leaders get monstered by the press, it comes with the territory (they've started their pre election Starmer attacks already).
Jezza's problem was that the vast majority was true or damn close.
Not just a bigoted old fool who claimed never to've changed his mind in his life but jaw droppingly overconfident & tragically thick

 

[rippleman]

Remarkable that Corbyn is still getting so much press; here and elsewhere. Even I have had to accept that Corbyn is finished as a significant political figure in this country.

But to those who continually feed off the "Corbyn is an anti-semite" trope, I would be interested to hear the views on Starmer being propped up by a pro-Israeli group

Two-fifths of Keir Starmer’s cabinet have been funded by pro-Israel lobbyists

As Labour refuses to join calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, Declassified reveals the extent to which the shadow cabinet, including Starmer himself, has been financed by a pro-Israel lobby group and an individual funder.

www.declassifieduk.org

This would explain why Starmer has consistently refused to call for a ceasefire in Gaza and is content to allow the Israeli slaughter of thousands of Palestinian children to continue unchecked.

Yes, a Starmer led Labour Party will win a landslide at the next GE. But a man with no compassion at the polar opposite end of the ME political spectrum will be doing it without this life-long Labour supporters vote.

 

[London Irish]

I'm from a (Northern) Irish family.
It wasn't

I'm also from a northern Irish family and either you are from settler stock or you forgot (or never learned in the first place) how Corbyn systematically defended the Irish community in Britain from numerous state attacks and racism here, one of the few politicians who did

 

[London Irish]

I campaigned at the last election and yes JC was obviously unpopular which I think had far more to with the concerted efforts to besmirch his reputation from the press the Tories and even some elements of his own party

Indeed - and this "friends of" bullshit is another example of the lies told about him. It doesn't mean you are mates or agree with someone but it's just standard international protocol language for someone you are believe should be engaged in a political dialogue for peace. Plenty of examples of Blair calling Putin and Chinese police state leaders "friends" - that's just how international diplomacy works. But of course the Tory press will only twist these words to represent something else against people who threaten their power and privilege - that ain't the likes of Blair and Starmer.

If the case against Corbyn was so good, you wouldn't have to keep printing these lies about him, but it isn't - that's why they have to lie and lie and lie and twist and lie

 

[aolstudios]

I'm also from a northern Irish family and either you are from settler stock or you forgot (or never learned in the first place) how Corbyn systematically defended the Irish community in Britain from numerous state attacks and racism here, one of the few politicians who did

"Settler stock"

 

[borat]

I'm also from a northern Irish family and either you are from settler stock or you forgot (or never learned in the first place) how Corbyn systematically defended the Irish community in Britain from numerous state attacks and racism here, one of the few politicians who did

Corbyn was also one of the few to speak out publicly about the Saudi bombardment and war crimes being committed in Yemen.

 

[London Irish]

Where’s your evidence for party discipline being under “right wing Labour”?

Furthermore, Corbyn was leader from 2015, so if it was still not under his control in 2018 that makes him a really shit leader. Starmer has control of the party and has for a good while. And, yes, that’s leadership.

The Prime Minister of this country has to be able to run Cabinet, Party and Parliament. Sounds like your “defence” of Corbyn is that he couldn’t run a bath.

The evidence is pretty obvious: Blairite loyalist Iain McNicol was the party general secretary up til 2018, the gensec controls all aspects of the party machinary including its (then shambolic) disciplinary department. A simple Google will tell you this.

But if you are genuinely interested in these issues, please look up the Forde report - too long to read for sure but at least look at some of the coverage of it. He was an independent barrister appointed by Starmer to investigate party performance in 2015-19 and his report was utterly damning of the behaviour of the Labour Right bureaucrats and how they damaged the party's election chances. That's why Starmer threw it in the bin, it was all the shitty work of his now-allies.

People have this hazy conception that when Corbyn won the leadership of the party in 2015 and 2016, that gave him total power over the party. Nothing could be further from the truth - it left in place huge numbers of full-time staff who were fanatically loyal only to Blairite politics. They never accepted Corbyn's mandate and worked tirelessly to obstruct and remove him from the leadership. A truly bizarre situation that wouldn't be tolerated in any other political party - but this is the unwritten law of British politics, any crap against the Left is legitimate, no matter how unfair or lacking any kind of natural justice

 

[London Irish]

"Settler stock"

You don't get to claim the Irish card if you don't give a f*** about what the community went through here

 

[borat]

Remarkable that Corbyn is still getting so much press; here and elsewhere. Even I have had to accept that Corbyn is finished as a significant political figure in this country.

But to those who continually feed off the "Corbyn is an anti-semite" trope, I would be interested to hear the views on Starmer being propped up by a pro-Israeli group

Two-fifths of Keir Starmer’s cabinet have been funded by pro-Israel lobbyists

As Labour refuses to join calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, Declassified reveals the extent to which the shadow cabinet, including Starmer himself, has been financed by a pro-Israel lobby group and an individual funder.

www.declassifieduk.org

This would explain why Starmer has consistently refused to call for a ceasefire in Gaza and is content to allow the Israeli slaughter of thousands of Palestinian children to continue unchecked.

Yes, a Starmer led Labour Party will win a landslide at the next GE. But a man with no compassion at the polar opposite end of the ME political spectrum will be doing it without this life-long Labour supporters vote.

Its fascinating isnt it. Starmer a self declared ''Zionist'' and member of Labour Friends of Israel - an Apartheid state currrently committing genocide is seen as ok by the media and is never declared a racist - whereas Corbyn a man who has for a lifetime has spoken out on behalf and fought for marginalised groups and the less well off in society is somehow smeared with racism.

 

[London Irish]

Corbyn was also one of the few to speak out publicly about the Saudi bombardment and war crimes being committed in Yemen.

Also when Blair and the British Establishment gave Putin his state reception, riding along in the carriage with the Queen (google the pics!) - who was outside in the streets protesting against Putin's annihilation of Chechyna? Corbyn - that's who and hardly any other UK politician.

You see, Putin was our "friend" then. Another insight into how British politics works, you have to forget this stuff

 

[Jim in the West]

Its fascinating isnt it. Starmer a self declared ''Zionist'' and member of Labour Friends of Israel - an Apartheid state currrently committing genocide is seen as ok by the media and is never declared a racist - whereas Corbyn a man who has for a lifetime has spoken out on behalf and fought for marginalised groups and the less well off in society is somehow smeared with racism.

I have to admit to being surprised how reluctant Labour has been to condemn Israel. Obviously Starmer is married to a Jewish woman, and - I believe - their children are raised in the Jewish faith. This must, surely, influence Starmer's position (it would be remarkable if it didn't). Having said that, I don't think there's much doubt that Corbyn had some fairly unpleasant views.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The evidence is pretty obvious: Blairite loyalist Iain McNicol was the party general secretary up til 2018, the gensec controls all aspects of the party machinary including its (then shambolic) disciplinary department. A simple Google will tell you this.

But if you are genuinely interested in these issues, please look up the Forde report - too long to read for sure but at least look at some of the coverage of it. He was an independent barrister appointed by Starmer to investigate party performance in 2015-19 and his report was utterly damning of the behaviour of the Labour Right bureaucrats and how they damaged the party's election chances. That's why Starmer threw it in the bin, it was all the shitty work of his now-allies.

People have this hazy conception that when Corbyn won the leadership of the party in 2015 and 2016, that gave him total power over the party. Nothing could be further from the truth - it left in place huge numbers of full-time staff who were fanatically loyal only to Blairite politics. They never accepted Corbyn's mandate and worked tirelessly to obstruct and remove him from the leadership. A truly bizarre situation that wouldn't be tolerated in any other political party - but this is the unwritten law of British politics, any crap against the Left is legitimate, no matter how unfair or lacking any kind of natural justice

No, again you damn him. A leader not taking control of those things is either lazy or incompetent.

Also when Blair and the British Establishment gave Putin his state reception, riding along in the carriage with the Queen (google the pics!) - who was outside in the streets protesting against Putin's annihilation of Chechyna? Corbyn - that's who and hardly any other UK politician.

You see, Putin was our "friend" then. Another insight into how British politics works, you have to forget this stuff

Who your friends are changes all the time in Geo-Politics or we'd still be working with the Soviets against Hitler.

 

[London Irish]

You’re crediting the OP with some kind of critical thought.

He’s just repeating the (far) right wing, populist press. Again.

Corbyn’s fan bois have done a pretty shit job of defending him though. You can only conclude they want five more years of Rishi.

What you are going to get is five years of something like a cross between John Major and David Cameron. Every Labour policy has been dumped by Starmer in his pursuit of Tory swing voters. If that's what you want, then I'm pleased for you. You'll forgive those of us who actually want some policies to address Britain's problems going on and looking for alternatives

 

[Guinness Boy]

What you are going to get is five years of something like a cross between John Major and David Cameron. Every Labour policy has been dumped by Starmer in his pursuit of Tory swing voters. If that's what you want, then I'm pleased for you. You'll forgive those of us who actually want some policies to address Britain's problems going on and looking for alternatives

After the complete shitshow that's taken place since 2015 I'd settle for a stable period of good leadership, gravitas and sensible centerism and it's clear the country agrees with me.

The last thing we need is another five years of ideology first, fringe politics driven by the minority wing of a parliamentary party.

 

[London Irish]

No, again you damn him. A leader not taking control of those things is either lazy or incompetent

I wouldn't call you lazy for not researching things like the Forde report that explain clearly why Corbyn couldn't defeat his entrenched enemies within the party - those entrenched enemies were backed by every wing of the British Establishment including its loyal toadying Press so it was a hell of a lot to defeat!

Now it's true that on Day One of being elected in 2015, Corbyn could have come in and said, most of this party is staffed by wrecking rightwing wankers and I'm going to sack you all and put my undying loyalists in place, maybe that guy London Irish wants a job?

Now this is where it gets complicated for those who don't have a clear idea how the Labour party works: the leader doesn't have the power to do that, only the NEC (the ruling party body) does, and the NEC was then made up of mostly Corbyn-friendly trade union reps who tend to believe wholesale sackings are a bad thing! The entire British press would of course also been up in arms with daily front page headlines about Stalinist purges tanking Labour's polling numbers, so there's that too.

But you know what? Even if Corbyn had the power to sack everyone and become Supreme Leader, it catastrophically misunderstands the man to believe he would EVER do this, even if he could. It's not who he is.

When he became leader, his pledge was to accept working with all wings of the party - the famous "broad church" and get them all working in the same direction. His aim was that the Left and Right of the party would unite around the policy platform that had just won the votes of the members and everyone work together towards election victory. How could that be squared with sacking and removing the Labour Right? It simply couldn't.

Now of course someone like you could still make the case that Corbyn was being fantastically naive that the Labour Right wouldn't stab him in the back every chance they got. And of course they did, they worked tirelessly through the Tory press to undermine him, create division and shove party resources only in the direction of their own Labour Right people.

Someone like you could say that Corbyn's naivity here was indeed, in your words, "incompetent" (he was never lazy, he did millions of events and meetings a day).

That's ok by me - as long as it's on the record what the Labour Right did to wreck Labour's chances of election victory. Remember in June 2017, they only came with a few thousands of votes in various constituences for Labour to be the biggest party in Parliament and Corbyn the Prime Minister, I will carry on admiring Corbyn for his different kind of approach to British politics, consensual, path-breaking, trusting people who fervently dislike you to do the right thing in the common cause ....

It didn't work but only those kind of politics are going to do anything about the horrible inequalities in British society we have now, Starmer won't do a thing about them because he hocked himself to the Murdochs of the world ages ago

 

[Guinness Boy]

I wouldn't call you lazy for not researching things like the Forde report that explain clearly why Corbyn couldn't defeat his entrenched enemies within the party - those entrenched enemies were backed by every wing of the British Establishment including its loyal toadying Press so it was a hell of a lot to defeat!

Now it's true that on Day One of being elected in 2015, Corbyn could have come in and said, most of this party is staffed by wrecking rightwing wankers and I'm going to sack you all and put my undying loyalists in place, maybe that guy London Irish wants a job?

Now this is where it gets complicated for those who don't have a clear idea how the Labour party works: the leader doesn't have the power to do that, only the NEC (the ruling party body) does, and the NEC was then made up of mostly Corbyn-friendly trade union reps who tend to believe wholesale sackings are a bad thing! The entire British press would of course also been up in arms with daily front page headlines about Stalinist purges tanking Labour's polling numbers, so there's that too.

But you know what? Even if Corbyn had the power to sack everyone and become Supreme Leader, it catastrophically misunderstands the man to believe he would EVER do this, even if he could. It's not who he is.

When he became leader, his pledge was to accept working with all wings of the party - the famous "broad church" and get them all working in the same direction. His aim was that the Left and Right of the party would unite around the policy platform that had just won the votes of the members and everyone work together towards election victory. How could that be squared with sacking and removing the Labour Right? It simply couldn't.

Now of course someone like you could still make the case that Corbyn was being fantastically naive that the Labour Right wouldn't stab him in the back every chance they got. And of course they did, they worked tirelessly through the Tory press to undermine him, create division and shove party resources only in the direction of their own Labour Right people.

Someone like you could say that Corbyn's naivity here was indeed, in your words, "incompetent" (he was never lazy, he did millions of events and meetings a day).

That's ok by me - as long as it's on the record what the Labour Right did to wreck Labour's chances of election victory. Remember in June 2017, they only came with a few thousands of votes in various constituences for Labour to be the biggest party in Parliament and Corbyn the Prime Minister, I will carry on admiring Corbyn for his different kind of approach to British politics, consensual, path-breaking, trusting people who ferventlu dislike you to do the right thing in the common cause ....

It didn't work but only those kind of politics are going to do anything about the horrible inequalities in British society we have now, Starmer won't do a thing about them because he hocked himself to the Murdochs of the world ages ago

His broad church presumably including positions of power for McDonald and Wrong-Daily as well as rampant anti-semitism and Momentum attempting to take over candidate lists?

He's damned by his actions however convincing you find his words.

 

[London Irish]

After the complete shitshow that's taken place since 2015 I'd settle for a stable period of good leadership, gravitas and sensible centerism and it's clear the country agrees with me.

The last thing we need is another five years of ideology first, fringe politics driven by the minority wing of a parliamentary party.

Centrism is an ideology I'm afraid. In the past 30 years it's kept all the rightwing shit that Thatcher did to this country in place, which is why no one can buy a house, our public services are a shitheap, our kids grow up with limited choices and the rich get richer at our expense. Starmer will keep all that in place, it won't be any different to the last 40 years. That's what he's promised the Tory newspaper barons